Right hemicolectomy: a network meta-analysis comparing open, laparoscopic-assisted, total laparoscopic, and robotic approach. Surg Endosc. 2019;33:1020-1032. [PMID: 30456506 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-018-6592-3]

Comparison of different surgical techniques and anastomosis methods in short-term outcomes of right colon cancer: a network meta-analysis of open surgery, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted techniques with extracorporeal and intracorporeal anastomosis

With the rapid development of minimally invasive surgical techniques, there remains considerable controversy regarding the choice of surgical approach and anastomosis method for patients with right-sded colon cancer (RSCC). This meta-analysis compared the short-term outcomes of open right colectomies (ORC), laparoscopic right colectomies with intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis (LRC-IA and LRC-EA), as well as robot right colectomies with intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis (RRC-IA and RRC-EA). A systematic search was conducted across PubMed (n = 549), Web of Science (n = 821), Embase (n = 591), and the Cochrane Central Register (n = 86) from January 2000 to August 2024. Studies comparing at least two of the surgical techniques for RSCC were included. The primary outcomes evaluated were overall complications, wound infection, ileus, and reoperation rates. Secondary outcomes included operative time, blood loss, hospital stay, time to resume diet, and conversion rates. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed. A total of 39 studies comprising 6098 patients were included. The results indicated that LRC-IA had the lowest overall complication rate (OR 0.65; 95% CI [0.41, 1.07]), while ORC had the highest. RRC-IA was most effective in reducing wound infection (OR 0.77; 95% CI [0.39, 1.35]), blood loss (MD 18.01; 95% CI [4.62, 40.87]), and hospital stay (MD 0.93; 95% CI [0.67, 1.31]), while also demonstrating advantages in preventing postoperative ileus (OR 0.47; 95% CI [0.05, 1.31]) and ensuring faster bowel function recovery (OR 0.80; 95% CI [0.44, 1.53]). The analysis demonstrates that for patients with RSCC, RRC shows better short-term outcomes compared to LRC and ORC, while IA also surpasses EA.

The distribution of robotic surgery in general and visceral surgery departments in Switzerland - a nationwide inquiry

Objectives

Since its introduction as a clinical technique, robotic surgery has been extended to different fields of surgery. However, the indications as well as the number of robotic procedures varied in different institutions. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the current use of robotic surgery in general and digestive surgery in Switzerland.

Methods

All Swiss surgical departments that are recognized training institutes for postgraduate training in surgery by the Swiss Institute of Medical Education (SIWF) were queried with a detailed questionnaire regarding the use of robotic surgery techniques and were analyzed regarding hospital size and type of hospital.

Results

Ninety-three departments were queried, and 67 % (n=63) answered the survey. Fifty-eight were public, and five were private institutions. Seventeen (26 %) of the queried departments used robotic surgery in digestive surgery. Four out of 17 (23 %) of the departments that performed robotic surgery were private hospitals, while 13 (77 %) were public institutions. In the majority of departments, robotic surgery of the rectum (n=12; 70.6 %) and colon (n=11; 64.7 %) was performed, followed by hernia procedures (n=8; 47.1 %) and fundoplication (n=7; 41.2 %). Less frequently, pancreatic resections (n=5; 29.4 %), cholecystectomy (n=4; 23.5 %), adrenalectomy (n=4; 23.5 %), gastric bypass (n=3; 17.7 %), gastric sleeve (n=3; 17.7 %), hepatic procedures (n=2; 11.7 %), or small bowel resections (n=1; 5.9 %) were performed as robotic procedures. More than 25 procedures per year per department were performed for hernia surgery (n=5 departments), gastric bypass (n=2 departments), cholecystectomy, fundoplication, and colon surgery (each n=1 department).

Conclusions

The number and range of robotic procedures performed in Switzerland varied widely. Higher accreditation for general surgery or subspecialization of visceral surgery of the department was positively associated with the use of robotic techniques, reflecting an unequal availability of robotic surgery.

Long-term Outcomes of Robot-assisted Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Colon Cancer: A Nationwide Register-based Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To determine long-term survival in patients undergoing robot-assisted surgery (RAS) or laparoscopic surgery (LAS) for colon cancer.

BACKGROUND

The potential long-term benefits of RAS compared with LAS for colon cancer are not well examined. Using a register-based approach, we aimed to compare these 2 surgical platforms in an analysis of long-term outcomes, including recurrence-free survival and all-cause- and colon cancer-specific mortality.

METHODS

A nationwide register-based cohort study of patients with Union for International Cancer Control stage I-III colon cancer undergoing planned RAS or LAS from 2010 through 2018. Patient demographic, clinical, and pathological data were retrieved from Danish national registers. Survival and recurrence rates were estimated by Cox proportional hazard multivariate regression analysis adjusting for baseline covariates.

RESULTS

A total of 7565 patients [LAS=6905 (91%) and RAS=660 (9%)] were included in the complete case survival analysis. Patients undergoing LAS had a significantly increased risk of cancer recurrence [LAS=1178 (17.1%), RAS=82 (12.4%), P =0.002] with a mean follow-up time of 4.93 years (standard deviation 2.47). The survival analysis of recurrence-free survival favored RAS [hazard ratio adjusted =0.80, 95% CI (0.64-1.00), P =0.049]. No associations between the 2 surgical platforms were evident regarding all-cause [hazard ratio adjusted =0.98, 95% CI (0.82-1.17), P =0.783] or colon cancer-specific mortality [hazard ratio adjusted =0.89, 95% CI (0.67-1.18), P =0.405].

CONCLUSIONS

Adopting RAS for colon cancer was associated with improved recurrence-free survival. However, it did not cause a lower all-cause- or colon cancer-specific mortality.

Long-term oncological outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic approaches for right colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The short-term outcomes of robotic right hemicolectomy for right colon cancer have been extensively studied in comparison to conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy. However, the long-term oncological outcomes of the two approaches have not been investigated, except in single-center retrospective studies. Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to investigate the long-term oncological outcomes of robotic right hemicolectomy compared with those of laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for right colon cancer.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library for studies comparing robotic right hemicolectomy with conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for right colon cancer from the date of database inception to August 2022. For survival data extraction, hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random- or fixed-effects models from the Kaplan-Meier survival curves in the included studies. All calculations and statistical tests were performed using Review Manager software, version 5.4.

RESULTS

A total of 523 patients (robotic right hemicolectomy, 230; laparoscopic right hemicolectomy, 293) from five studies were included in this meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in patient characteristics between the two groups. In terms of pathological characteristics, TNM stage was not different and revealed no differences in the number of harvested lymph nodes even though a larger number of lymph nodes were harvested in the robotic group in one study. Pooled analyses demonstrated no significant difference in disease-free survival (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.46-1.13, p = 0.15) and overall survival (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.48-1.13, p = 0.16) between robotic and laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for right colon cancer.

CONCLUSION

Robotic right hemicolectomy for right colon cancer is comparable with conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy in terms of long-term oncological survival. More prospective, multicenter, randomized trials are necessary to determine the oncologic safety of robotic right hemicolectomy.

Comparison of robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in colorectal cancer resection: a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Introduction

There is still controversy on whether or not robot-assisted colorectal surgery (RACS) have advantages over laparoscopic-assisted colorectal surgery(LACS).

Materials and methods

The four databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library)were comprehensively searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the outcomes of RACS and LACS in the treatment of colorectal cancer from inception to 22 July 2023.

Results

Eleven RCTs were considered eligible for the meta-analysis. Compared with LACS,RACS has significantly longer operation time(MD=5.19,95%CI: 18.00,39.82, P<0.00001), but shorter hospital stay(MD=2.97,95%CI:-1.60,-0.33,P = 0.003),lower conversion rate(RR=3.62,95%CI:0.40,0.76,P = 0.0003), lower complication rate(RR=3.31,95%CI:0.64,0.89,P=0.0009),fewer blood loss(MD=2.71,95%CI:-33.24,-5.35,P = 0.007),lower reoperation rate(RR=2.12, 95%CI:0.33,0.96,P=0.03)and longer distal resection margin(MD=2.16, 95%CI:0.04,0.94, P = 0.03). There was no significantly difference in harvested lymph nodes, the time of first flatus, the time of first defecation,the time of first resume diet, proximal resection margin, readmission rates, mortalities and CRM+ rates between two group.

Conclusions

Our study indicated that RACS is a feasible and safe technique that can achieve better surgical efficacy compared with LACS in terms of short-term outcomes.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42023447088.

Ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease: robotic intracorporeal compared to laparoscopic extracorporeal anastomosis

Laparoscopy is the first-line approach in ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease. Emerging data has shown better short-term outcomes with robotic right colectomy for cancer when compared to laparoscopic approach. However, robotic ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease has only shown faster return to bowel function. We aimed to evaluate short-term outcomes of ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease between robotic intracorporeal anastomosis (RICA) and laparoscopic extracorporeal anastomosis (LECA). Patients undergoing minimally invasive ileocolic resections for Crohn's disease were retrospectively identified using a prospectively maintained database between 2014 and 2021 in two referral centers. Among the 239 patients, 70 (29%) underwent RICA while 169 (71%) LECA. Both groups were similar according to baseline and preoperative characteristics. RICA was associated with more intraoperative adhesiolysis and longer operative time [RICA: 238 ± 79 min vs. LECA: 143 ± 52 min; p < 0.001]. 30-day postoperative complications were not different between the two groups [RICA: 17/70(24%) vs. LECA: 54/169(32%); p = 0.238]. Surgical site infections [RICA: 0/70 vs. LECA: 16/169(10%); p = 0.004], intra-abdominal septic complications [RICA: 0/70 vs. LECA: 14/169(8%); p = 0.012], and Clavien-Dindo ≥ III complications [RICA: 1/70(1%) vs. LECA: 15/169(9%); p = 0.044] were less frequent in RICA. Return to bowel function [RICA: 2.1 ± 1.1 vs. LECA: 2.6 ± 1.2 days; p = 0.002] and length of stay [RICA: 3.4 ± 2.2 vs. LECA: 4.2 ± 2.5 days; p = 0.015] were shorter after RICA, with similar readmission rates. RICA demonstrated better short-term postoperative outcomes than LECA, with reduced Clavien-Dindo ≥ III complications, surgical site infections, intra-abdominal septic complications, shorter length of stay, and faster return to bowel function, despite the longer operative time.

Robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision: a retrospective multicenter study with propensity score matching

Objective

During the past decade, the concept of complete mesocolic excision (CME) has been developed in an attempt to minimize recurrence for right-sided colon cancer. This study aims to compare outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with CME for right-sided colon cancer.

Methods

We performed a retrospective multicenter propensity score matching study. From July 2016 to July 2021, 382 consecutive patients from different Chinese surgical departments were available for inclusion out of an initial cohort of 412, who underwent robotic or laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with CME. Data of all patients were retrospectively collected and reviewed. Of these, 149 cases were performed by a robotic approach, while the other 233 cases were done by laparoscopy. Propensity score matching was applied at a ratio of 1:1 to compare perioperative, pathologic, and oncologic outcomes between the robotic and the laparoscopic groups (n = 142).

Results

Before propensity score matching, there were no statistical differences regarding the sex, history of abdominal surgery, body mass index (BMI), American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system, tumor location, and center between groups (p > 0.05), while a significant difference was observed regarding age (p = 0.029). After matching, two comparable groups of 142 cases were obtained with equivalent patient characteristics (p > 0.05). Blood loss, time to oral intake, return of bowel function, length of stay, and complications were not different between groups (p > 0.05). The robotic group showed a significantly lower conversion rate (0% vs. 4.2%, p = 0.03), but a longer operative time (200.9 min vs. 182.3 min, p < 0.001) and a higher total hospital cost (85,016 RMB vs. 58,266 RMB, p < 0.001) compared with the laparoscopic group. The number of harvested lymph nodes was comparable (20.4 vs. 20.5, p = 0.861). Incidence of complications, mortality, and pathologic outcomes were similar between groups (p > 0.05). The 2-year disease-free survival rates were 84.9% and 87.1% (p = 0.679), and the overall survival rates between groups were 83.8% and 80.7% (p = 0.943).

Conclusion

Despite the limitations of a retrospective analysis, the outcomes of robotic right hemicolectomy with CME were comparable to the laparoscopic procedures with fewer conversions to open surgery. More clinical advantages of the robotic surgery system need to be further confirmed by well-conducted randomized clinical trials with large cohorts of patients.

Efficacy of laparoscopic Toupet fundoplication compared to endoscopic and surgical procedures for GERD treatment: a randomized trials network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

We aim to review and quantitatively compare laparoscopic Toupet fundoplication (LTF), Nissen fundoplication (LNF), anterior partial fundoplication (APF), magnetic augmentation sphincter (MSA), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF), proton pump inhibitor (PPI), and placebo for the treatment of GERD. A number of meta-analyses compared the efficacy of surgical and endoscopic procedures for recalcitrant GERD, but considerable debate on the effectiveness of operative strategies remains.

METHODS

A systematic review of MEDLINE databases, EMBASE, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the aforementioned surgical and endoscopic GERD treatments was performed. Risk ratio and weighted mean difference were used as pooled effect size measures, whereas 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used to assess relative inference.

RESULTS

Thirty-three RCTs were included. Surgical and endoscopic treatments have similar RR for heartburn, regurgitation, bloating. LTF has a lower RR of post-operative dysphagia when compared to APF (RR 3.3; Crl 1.4-7.1) and LNF (RR 2.5; Crl 1.3-4.4). The pooled network meta-analysis did not observe any significant improvement regarding LES pressure and pH < from baseline. LTF, APF, LNF, MSA, RFA, and TIF had have a similar post-operative PPI discontinuation rate.

CONCLUSION

LTF has a lower rate of post-operative dysphagia when compared to APF and LNF. The pre-post effects, such as GERD-HQRL, LES pressure, and pH <4, should be avoided in meta-analyses because results may be biased. Last, a consensus about the evaluation of GERD treatments' efficacy and their outcomes is needed.

The Learning Curve of Da Vinci Robot-Assisted Hemicolectomy for Colon Cancer: A Retrospective Study of 76 Cases at a Single Center

Background and Aims

Robotic-assisted right hemicolectomy (RARH) has many benefits in treating colon cancer, but it is a new technology that needs to be evaluated. This study aims to assess the learning curve (LC) of RARH procedures with the complete mesoscopic exception and D3 lymph node dissection for colon carcinoma.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on a consecutive series of 76 patients who underwent RARH from July 2014 to March 2018. The operation time was evaluated using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method to analyze the LC. The patients were categorized into two groups based on the LC: Phase I and Phase II. Statistical methods were used to compare clinicopathological data on intraoperative and perioperative outcomes at different stages of the study.

Results

The peak point of the LC was observed in the 27th case. Using the CUSUM method, we divide the LC into two stages. Stage 1 (initial learning stage): Cases 1–27 and Stage 2 (proficiency phase): Cases 28–76. There were no obvious distinctions between the two patients’ essential characteristics (age, sex, body mass index, clinical stage, and ASA score). The mean operation time of each group is 187.37 ± 45.56 min and 161.1 ± 37.74 min (P = 0.009), respectively. The intraoperative blood loss of each group is 170.4 ± 217.2 ml and 95.7 ± 72.8 ml (P = 0.031), respectively.

Conclusion

Based on the LC with CUSUM analysis, the data suggest that the learning phase of RARH was achieved after 27 cases. The operation time and the intraoperative blood loss decrease with more cases performed.

Right colectomy from open to robotic - a single-center experience with functional outcomes in a learning-curve setting

Purpose

Right colectomy (RC) is a frequently performed procedure. Beneath standard conventional open surgery (COS), various minimally invasive techniques had been introduced. Several advantages had recently been described for robotic approaches over COS or conventional laparoscopy. Nevertheless, novel minimally invasive techniques require continuous benchmarking against standard COS to gain maximum patient safety. Bowel dysfunction is a frequent problem after RC. Together with general complication rates postoperative bowel recovery are used as surrogate parameters for postoperative patient outcome in this study.

Methods

Retrospective, 10-year single-center analysis of consecutive patients who underwent sequentially either COS (n = 22), robotic-assisted (ECA: n = 39), or total robotic surgery (ICA: n = 56) for oncologic RC was performed.

Results

The conversion from robotic to open surgery rate was low (overall: 3.2%). Slightly longer duration of surgery had been observed during the early phase after introduction of the robotic program to RC (ECA versus COS, p = 0.044), but not anymore thereafter (versus ICA). No differences were observed in oncologic parameters including rates of tumor-negative margins, lymph node-positive patients, and lymph node yield during mesocolic excision. Both robotic approaches are beneficial regarding postoperative complication rates, especially wound infections, and shorter length of in-hospital stay compared with COS. The duration until first postoperative stool is the shortest after ICA (COS: 4 [2–8] days, ECA: 3 [1–6] days, ICA: 3 [1–5] days, p = 0.0004). Regression analyses reveal neither a longer duration of surgery nor the extent of mesocolic excision, but the degree of minimally invasiveness and postoperative systemic inflammation contribute to postoperative bowel dysfunction, which prolongs postoperative in-hospital stay significantly.

Conclusion

The current study reflects the institutional learning curve of oncologic RC during implementation of robotic surgery from robotic-assisted to total robotic approach without compromises in oncologic results and patient safety. However, the total robotic approach is beneficial regarding postoperative bowel recovery and general patient outcome.

Comparison of Short-Term Results of Laparoscopic and Open Surgeries for Colorectal Cancer: A Single-Center Experience

OBJECTIVE

Although laparoscopic colon cancer surgeries have increased in recent years, their oncological competence is questioned. In our study, we aimed to evaluate oncological competence by comparing laparoscopic and open surgery.

METHOD

The study was planned retrospectively. A total of 94 patients were included in the study, 42 of whom underwent laparoscopy, and 52 patients underwent open surgery. Both groups were compared in terms of demographic characteristics, staging, number of benign/malignant lymph nodes, histological findings, and complications.

RESULT

The final pathology report of all patients was adenocarcinoma. The median number of dissected lymph nodes was 20.9 in the open group (8-34) and 19.46 in the laparoscopy group (7-31) (p = 0.639). The median number of dissected malignant lymph nodes was 1 (0-13) in the open surgery group and 3.1 (0-8) in the laparoscopy group (p = 0.216). The laparoscopy group exhibited a longer operation time (281.2 ± 54.2 and 221.0 ± 51.5 min, respectively; p = 0.036) than the open surgery group, but a shorter intensive care unit (ICU) discharge, quicker initiation oral feeding, and shorter length of hospital stay (4.0 ± 0.9 vs 5.7 ± 2.0 days, respectively; p < 0.001).

DISCUSSION

Laparoscopic surgery elicits many benefits such as less wound infection, lower requirement for blood transfusion, shorter hospitalization, quicker initiation of oral feeding, and mobilization. Our study has shown that laparoscopic surgery provides quite adequate lymph node dissection when compared to oncological surgery, which is viewed with suspicion in the light of these benefits of laparoscopy.

Predictors of surgical outcomes of minimally invasive right colectomy: the MERCY study

PURPOSE

The optimal approach for minimally invasive (MIS) right colectomy remains under debate. This study aimed to describe surgical trends in the treatment of nonmetastatic right colon cancer and to identify predictors of short-term surgical outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective multicenter cohort study of Minimally-invasivE surgery for oncologic Right ColectomY (MERCY) was conducted on patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic right colectomy between 2014 and 2020. Classification tree approach was used to describe the extracorporeal (EA) or intracorporeal (IA) anastomosis choice. Mixed-model regressions were used to identify patient- and surgery-related factors predictive of postoperative outcomes. A questionnaire was used to evaluate the surgeons' perspectives.

RESULTS

The MERCY database comprised 1870 patients; 87.2% underwent laparoscopy, and 68.1% received an EA. A clear surgical trend was noted, with an increasing rate of IA and robotic procedures after 2017. EA represented 41% of anastomoses in centers equipped with a robotic surgical system. Mixed-model regressions (on 1088 patients) showed that age, sex, BMI, comorbidity, robotics, IA, and conversion to open surgery were predictors of surgical outcomes. In particular, IA was a predictor of a shorter time to regular diet and fewer surgical site infections. Based on the questionnaire, IA was the preferred over EA by 72% of surgeons.

CONCLUSION

MIS continues to evolve, with an increasing number of IA being performed in the recent years and when using a robotic surgical system. Understanding the role of predictors of surgical outcomes may help surgeons personalize decision-making among the different MIS options to manage right colon cancer.

Staple Line Reinforcement During Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Purpose

Staple line reinforcement (SLR) during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is controversial. The purpose of this study was to perform a comprehensive evaluation of the most commonly utilized techniques for SLR.

Materials and Methods

Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare no reinforcement (NR), suture oversewing (SR), glue reinforcement (GR), bioabsorbable staple line reinforcement (Gore® Seamguard®) (GoR), and clips reinforcement (CR). Risk Ratio (RR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used as pooled effect size measures.

Results

Overall, 3994 patients (17 RCTs) were included. Of those, 1641 (41.1%) underwent NR, 1507 (37.7%) SR, 689 (17.2%) GR, 107 (2.7%) GoR, and 50 (1.3%) CR. SR was associated with a significantly reduced risk of bleeding (RR=0.51; 95% CrI 0.31–0.88), staple line leak (RR=0.56; 95% CrI 0.32–0.99), and overall complications (RR=0.50; 95% CrI 0.30–0.88) compared to NR while no differences were found vs. GR, GoR, and CR. Operative time was significantly longer for SR (WMD=16.2; 95% CrI 10.8–21.7), GR (WMD=15.0; 95% CrI 7.7–22.4), and GoR (WMD=15.5; 95% CrI 5.6–25.4) compared to NR. Among treatments, there were no significant differences for surgical site infection (SSI), sleeve stenosis, reoperation, hospital length of stay, and 30-day mortality.

Conclusions

SR seems associated with a reduced risk of bleeding, leak, and overall complications compared to NR while no differences were found vs. GR, GoR, and CR. Data regarding GoR and CR are limited while further trials reporting outcomes for these techniques are warranted.

Graphical abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11695-022-05950-z.

Comparison of Short- and Long-term Outcomes of Laparoscopic and Open Right Hemicolectomy for Colon Cancer

<br><b>Introduction:</b> Colorectal cancer is still among the most common malignancies in the world.</br> <br><b>Aim:</b> The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of open and laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for colon cancer.</br> <br><b>Materials and methods:</b> This retrospective study included 87 patients who underwent laparoscopic and open right hemicolectomy for colon cancer between January 2014 and January 2020. Patients were categorized into two groups according to the surgical technique: laparoscopic (46 cases) and open (41 cases). Patient characteristics and clinicopathological findings, surgical findings, short- and long-term results were included in the evaluation parameters. Patients with pathological diagnosis other than adenocarcinoma, distant metastases, and incomplete file datas were excluded from the study.</br> <br><b>Results:</b> Forty-six (52.9%) patients underwent laparoscopic and 41 (47.1%) patients underwent open right hemicolectomy. The operation time of the laparoscopic group was found to be significantly higher (P<0.001). The amount of blood loss was significantly higher in the open group (P < 0.001). The incidence of post-operative complications in the open group (26.8%) was higher than in the laparoscopic group (6.5%) (P = 0.010). The rate of anastomotic leakage (9.8%) was higher in patients who underwent open surgery compared to laparoscopic group (0%) (P = 0.045). It was found that the laparoscopic group had a shorter hospital stay (P = 0.009). No statistically significant differences were found between the groups in terms of overall overall survival (OS) rate (P = 0.400) and disease-free survival (DFS) rate (P = 0.781).</br> <br><b>Conclusion:</b> Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for colon cancer is a feasible and reliable method with lower postoperative morbidity and similar long-term results to the open method.</br>

Techniques for reconstruction after distal gastrectomy for cancer: updated network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The choice of the best reconstruction technique after distal gastrectomy (DG) remains controversial and still not defined. The purpose was to perform a comprehensive evaluation within the major type of intestinal reconstruction after DG for gastric cancer.

METHODS

Systematic review and network meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare Billroth I (BI), Billroth II (BII), Billroth II Braun (BII Braun), Roux-en-Y (RY), and Uncut Roux-en-Y (URY). Risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were used as pooled effect size measures while 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used to assess relative inference.

RESULTS

Ten RCTs (1456 patients) were included. Of these, 448 (33.7%) underwent BI, 220 (15.1%) BII, 114 BII Braun (7.8%), 533 (36.6%) RY, and 141 URY (9.6%). No significant differences were found among treatments for 30-day mortality, anastomotic leak, anastomotic stricture, and overall complications. At 12-month follow-up, RY was associated with a significantly reduced risk of remnant gastritis compared to BI (RR=0.56; 95% Crl 0.35-0.76) and BII reconstruction (RR=0.47; 95% Crl 0.22-0.97). Similarly, despite the lack of statistical significance, RY seems associated with a trend toward reduced endoscopically proven esophagitis compared to BI (RR=0.58; 95% Crl 0.24-1.51) and bile reflux compared to BI (RR=0.48; 95% Crl 0.17-1.41), BII (RR=0.74; 95% Crl 0.20-2.81), and BII Braun (RR=0.65; 95% Crl 0.30-1.43).

CONCLUSIONS

This network meta-analysis shows that there are five main options for intestinal anastomosis after DG. All techniques seem equally safe with comparable anastomotic leak, anastomotic stricture, overall morbidity, and short-term outcomes. In the short-term follow-up (12 months), RY seems associated with a reduced risk of remnant gastritis and a trend toward a reduced risk of bile reflux and esophagitis.

Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic technique for the treatment of left-sided colonic diverticular disease: a systematic review with meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Minimally invasive surgery has been universally accepted as a valid option for the treatment of diverticular disease, provided specific expertise is available. Over the last decade, there has been a growing interest in the application of robotic approaches for diverticular disease. We aimed at evaluating whether robotic colectomy may offer some advantages over the laparoscopic approach for surgical treatment of diverticular disease by meta-analyzing the available data from the medical literature.

METHODS

The PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, and Web Of Sciences electronic databases were searched for literature up to December 2020. Inclusion criteria considered all comparative studies evaluating robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy for diverticulitis eligible. The conversion rate to the open approach was evaluated as the primary outcome.

RESULTS

The data of 4177 patients from nine studies were included in the analysis. There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics. Patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy compared to those who underwent surgery with a robotic approach had a significantly higher risk of conversion into an open procedure (12.5% vs. 7.4%, p < 0.00001) and abbreviated hospital stay (p < 0.0001) at the price of a longer operating time (p < 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

Compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery, the robotic approach offers significant advantages in terms of conversion rate and shortened hospital stay for the treatment of diverticular disease. However, because of the lack of available evidence, it is impossible to draw definitive conclusions.

Short-term outcomes in robot-assisted compared to laparoscopic colon cancer resections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Robot-assisted surgery is increasingly adopted in colorectal surgery. However, evidence for the implementation of robot-assisted surgery for colon cancer is sparse. This study aims to evaluate the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted colon surgery (RCS) for cancer compared to laparoscopic colon surgery (LCS).

Methods

Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library were searched between January 1, 2005 and October 2, 2020. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies were included. Non-original literature was excluded. Primary endpoints were anastomotic leakage rate, conversion to open surgery, operative time, and length of hospital stay. Secondary endpoints were surgical efficacy and postoperative morbidity. We evaluated risk of bias using RoB2 and ROBINS-I quality assessment tools. We performed a pooled analysis of primary and secondary endpoints. Heterogeneity was assessed by I², and possible causes were explored by sensitivity- and meta-regression analyses. Publication bias was evaluated by Funnel plots and Eggers linear regression test. The level of evidence was assessed by GRADE.

Results

Twenty studies enrolling 13,799 patients (RCS 1740 (12.6%) and LCS 12,059 (87.4%) were included in the meta-analysis that demonstrated RCS was superior regarding: anastomotic leakage (odds ratio (OR) = 0.54, 95% CI [0.32, 0.94]), conversion (OR = 0.31, 95% CI [0.23, 0.41]), overall complication rate (OR = 0.85, 95% CI [0.73, 1.00]) and time to regular diet (MD =  − 0.29, 95% CI [− 0.56, 0.02]). LCS proved to have a shortened operative time compared to RCS (MD = 42.99, 95% CI [28.37, 57.60]). Level of evidence was very low according to GRADE.

Conclusion

RCS showed advantages in colonic cancer surgery regarding surgical efficacy and morbidity compared to LCS despite a predominant inclusion of non-RCT with serious risk of bias assessment and a very low level of evidence.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-021-08782-7.

Robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a retrospective cohort study of the Binational Colorectal Cancer Database

Robotic right hemicolectomy (RRC) may have technical advantages over the conventional laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) due to higher degrees of rotation, articulation, and tri-dimensional imaging. There is growing literature describing advantages of RRC compared to LRC; however, there is a lack of evidence about safety, oncologic quality of surgery and cost. This study aimed to analyse complication rates, length of stay and nodal harvest in patients undergoing minimally invasive right hemicolectomy for colon cancer from a prospective Australasian colorectal cancer database. This was a retrospective cohort study using nearest neighbour matching. The Binational Colorectal Cancer Audit (BCCA) provided the data for analysis. The primary outcome was length of stay. Secondary outcomes were harvested lymph node count, anastomotic leak, postoperative haemorrhage, abdominal abscess, postoperative ileus, wound infections and non-surgical complications. 4977 patients who underwent robotic (n = 146) or laparoscopic (n = 4831) right hemicolectomy for right-sided colon cancer were included. For RRC, LOS was shorter (5 vs 6.9 days, p = 0.01) and nodal harvest was higher (22 vs 19, p = 0.04). For RRC, surgical complications (5.9% vs 14.2%, p < 0.004) and non-surgical complications (4.6% vs 11.7%, p = 0.007) were lower though there was no difference in return to theatre or inpatient death. Robotic right hemicolectomy is associated shorter LOS and marginally higher lymph node count, though this may reflect anastomotic technique rather than surgical platform. Longer term studies are required to establish differences in overall survival, incisional hernia rates and cost effectiveness.

C-reactive protein level on postoperative day 3 as a predictor of anastomotic leakage after elective right-sided colectomy

PURPOSE

To investigate the factors predictive of anastomotic leakage in patients undergoing elective right-sided colectomy.

METHODS

The subjects of this retrospective study were 247 patients who underwent elective right hemicolectomy or ileocecal resection with ileocolic anastomosis between April 2012 and March 2019, at our institution.

RESULTS

Anastomotic leakage occurred in 9 of the 247 patients (3.6%) and was diagnosed on median postoperative day (POD) 7 (range POD 3-12). There were no significant differences in the background factors or preoperative laboratory data between the patients with anastomotic leakage (anastomotic leakage group) and those without anastomotic leakage (no anastomotic leakage group). Open surgery was significantly more common than laparoscopic surgery (P = 0.027), and end-to-side anastomosis was less common (P = 0.025) in the anastomotic leakage group. The C-reactive protein (CRP) level in the anastomotic leakage group was higher than that in the no anastomotic leakage group on PODs 3 (P < 0.001) and 5 (P < 0.001). ROC curve analysis revealed that anastomotic leakage was significantly more frequent in patients with a serum CRP level ≥ 11.8 mg/dL [area under the curve (AUC) 0.83].

CONCLUSION

A serum CRP level ≥ 11.8 mg/dL on POD 3 was predictive of anastomotic leakage being detected on median POD 7.

Right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis for cancer: a prospective comparison between robotics and laparoscopy

Robotics in right colectomy are still under debate. Available studies compare different techniques of ileocolic anastomosis but results are non-conclusive. Our study aimed to compare intraoperative outcomes, and short-term postoperative results between robotic and standard laparoscopic right colectomies for cancer with intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) fashioned with the same technique. All consecutive patients scheduled for laparoscopic or robotic right hemicolectomies with ICA for cancer in two hospitals, one of which is a tertiary care centre, were prospectively enrolled in our prospective observational study, from April 2018 to December 2019. ICA was fashioned with the same stapled hand-sewn technique. Continuous and categorical variables were analysed using t test and chi-squared test as required. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Forty patients underwent laparoscopic surgery, and 48 underwent robotic right colectomy and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Operative time was not statistically different between the two groups (robotic group 265.9 min vs laparoscopic group 254.2 min, p = 0.29). The robotic group had a significantly shorter time for stump oversewing (ileum reinforcement: robotic group 9.3 min vs laparoscopic group 14.2 min, p < 0.001; colon reinforcement: robotic 7.7. min, laparoscopy 13.9 min, p < 0.001) and for ICA (robotic 31.6 min vs laparoscopy 43.0, p < 0.001). One patient underwent extracorporeal anastomosis in the robotic group. The short-term outcomes were comparable between standard laparoscopic and robotic right colectomies with ICA. The limitation of the study is its small sample size and the fact that it was done in two institutions under the supervision of one person. Our data demonstrate that intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis is safe, and faster and easier with robotic systems. Robotics can facilitate more challenging ICA in minimally invasive surgery.

Robotic versus laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Ventral mesh rectopexy is frequently performed as a means of improving the quality of life for sufferers of rectal prolapse. The minimally invasive approach is highly desirable but can be technically difficult to achieve in the narrow confines of the pelvis. The robotic platform is becoming a more common means of overcoming these difficulties, but evidence of an objective benefit over standard laparoscopy is scarce. This study seeks to review and analyse the data comparing outcomes after robotic and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy.

METHOD

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane database for papers comparing robotic to laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy. Comparable data was pooled for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Six studies compared outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy. Sample sizes were relatively small, and only two of the studies were randomised. Pooled analysis was possible for data on operating time, complication rates, conversion rates and length of stay in hospital. This showed a non-significant trend towards longer operating times and a statistically significant reduction in length of stay after robotic procedures. There was no significant difference in complication and conversion rates.

CONCLUSION

The frequent finding of longer operating time for robotic surgery was not confirmed in this study. Shorter length of stay in hospital was seen, with other post-operative outcomes showing no significant difference. More data is needed with cost-benefit analyses to show whether the robotic platform is justified.

2D vs 3D laparoscopic right colectomy: A propensity score-matching comparison of personal experience with systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The benefits of laparoscopic approach for right colectomy have been well established. However, the technical difficulty to construct the intra-corporeal anastomosis is still cumbersome.

AIM

To analyze the results of 3D and 2D laparoscopic right colectomy and to compare it to the published series through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

A retrospective study with propensity score matching analysis of patients undergoing laparoscopic right colectomy at Umbria2 Hospitals from January 2014 to March 2020 was performed. A systematic review was accomplished comparing 2D and 3D right colectomy.

RESULTS

In the personal series 47 patients of the 2D group were matched to 47 patients of the 3D group. The 3D group showed a favorable trend in terms of mean operative time (170.7 ± 32.9 min vs 183.8 ± 35.4 min; P = 0.053) and a significant lower anastomotic time (16.9 ± 2.3 min vs 19.6 ± 2.9 min, P < 0.001). The complete mesocolic excision (CME) subgroups analysis showed a shorter anastomotic time (16.5 ± 1.8 min vs 19.9 ± 3.0 min; P < 0.001) and operative time (175.0 ± 38.5 min vs 193.7 ± 37.1 min; P = 0.063) in the 3D group. Six studies and our series were included in the meta-analysis with 551 patients (2D group: 291; 3D group: 260).The pooled analysis demonstrated a significant difference in favour of the 3D group regarding the operative time (P < 0.001) and the anastomotic time (P < 0.001) while no differences were identified between groups in terms of blood loss (P = 0.827), LNH yield (P = 0.243), time to first flatus (P = 0.333), postoperative complications (P = 0.718) and length of stay (P = 0.835).

CONCLUSION

The meta-analysis results showed that 3D laparoscopic right colectomy shortens operative and anastomotic time without affecting the standard lymphadenectomy. In our series, the advantage of the 3D system becomes evident when CME and/or more complex associated procedure are requested significantly reducing both the total operative and the anastomotic time.

Improved perioperative outcomes and reduced inflammatory stress response in malignant robot-assisted colorectal resections: a retrospective cohort study of 298 patients

Background

Robot-assisted surgery is increasingly implemented for the resection of colorectal cancer, although the scientific evidence for adopting this technique is still limited. This study’s main objective was to compare short-term complication rates, oncological outcomes, and the inflammatory stress response after colorectal resection for cancer performed laparoscopic or robot-assisted.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study comparing the robot-assisted approach to laparoscopic surgery for elective malignant colorectal neoplasm. Certified colorectal and da Vinci ® robotic surgeons performed resections at a Danish tertiary colorectal high volume center from May 2017 to March 2019. We analyzed the two surgical groups using uni- and multivariate regression analyses to detect differences in intra- and postoperative clinical outcomes and the inflammatory stress response.

Results

Two hundred and ninety-eight patients were enrolled in the study. Significant differences favoring robot-assisted surgery was demonstrated for; length of hospital stay (4 days, interquartile range (4, 5) versus 5 days, interquartile range (4–7), p < 0.001), and intraoperative blood loss (50 mL, interquartile range (20–100) versus 100 mL, interquartile range (50–150), p < 0.001) compared to laparoscopic surgery. The inflammatory stress response was significantly higher after laparoscopic compared to robot-assisted surgery reflected by an increase in C-reactive protein concentration (exponentiated coefficient = 1.23, 95% confidence interval (1.06–1.46), p = 0.008). No differences between the two groups were found concerning mortality, microradical resection rate, conversion to open surgery, and surgical or medical short-term complication rates.

Conclusion

Robot-assisted surgery is feasible and can be safely implemented for colorectal resections. The robot-assisted approach, when compared to laparoscopic surgery, was associated with improved intra- and postoperative outcomes. Extensive prospective studies are needed to determine the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic surgery for colorectal cancer.

Surgical stress and metabolic response after totally laparoscopic right colectomy

No clear consensus on the need to perform an intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) after laparoscopic right colectomy is currently available. One of the potential benefits of intracorporeal anastomosis may be a reduction in surgical stress. Herein, we evaluated the surgical stress response and the metabolic response in patients who underwent right colonic resection for colon cancer. Fifty-nine patients who underwent laparoscopic resection for right colon cancer were randomized to receive an intracorporeal or an extracorporeal anastomosis (EA). Data including demographics (age, sex, BMI and ASA score), pathological (AJCC tumour stage and tumour localization) and surgical results were recorded. Moreover, to determine the levels of the inflammatory response, mediators, such as C-reactive protein (CRP), tumour necrosis factor (TNF), interleukin 1β (IL-1β), IL-6, IL-10, and IL-13, were evaluated. Similarly, cortisol and insulin levels were evaluated as hormonal responses to surgical stress. We found that the proinflammatory mediator IL-6, CRP, TNF and IL-1β levels, were significantly reduced in IA compared to EA. Concurrently, an improved profile of the anti-inflammatory cytokines IL-10 and IL-13 was observed in the IA group. Relative to the hormone response to surgical stress, cortisol was increased in patients who underwent EA, while insulin was reduced in the EA group. Based on these results, surgical stress and metabolic response to IA justify advocating the adoption of a totally laparoscopic approach when performing a right colectomy for cancer.

This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT03422588).

The impact of intracorporeal anastomosis in right laparoscopic colectomy in the surgical site infections and the hospital stay: a cohort study

Ileocolic anastomosis in laparoscopic-assisted right colectomy is frequently performed extracorporeally. Intracorporeal anastomosis could be associated with several short-term benefits. However, it is a more technically demanding procedure. The primary endpoint of the study aimed to evaluate the postoperative surgical-site infection rate and its impact on the length of hospital stay after laparoscopic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis compared to extracorporeal anastomoses. Between 2010 and 2019, 108 unselected consecutive patients underwent right colectomy. An observational comparative cohort study of two anastomosis techniques, intracorporeal (IA) versus extracorporeal (EA), was conducted. Data were extracted from a prospectively maintained colorectal surgery database of a university-affiliated hospital and retrospectively analyzed. The main exclusion criteria were emergency surgery and medical or anesthetic contraindication for laparoscopy. 53 patients underwent right colectomy with IA, and 55 had extracorporeal anastomoses. The groups did not differ in demographics, anesthetic risk, intraoperative data, pathological outcomes, or overall survival. Mean operative time was longer in the IA group (156.9 vs. 146.0 min; p = 0.061). A significant reduction in the anastomotic leak rate was observed in the IA group compared with the EA group (0 vs. 7.3%; p = 0.045) with no differences in the intraabdominal abscess rate (IA: 1.9% vs. EA: 1.8%; p = 0.97). The wound infection rate was 5.7% for IA and 10.9% for EA (p = 0.324). The hospital stay was significantly shorter for those who had intracorporeal anastomoses (5.2 ± 3.3 vs. 10.8 ± 9.6 days; p = 0.000). Right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis was associated with less surgical-site infections and a significantly shorter hospital stay than EA technique. Surgeons should consider the IA as the first option when performing laparoscopic right colectomy. Registration number: NCT04350203 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov ).

Laparoscopic versus Open Transverse-Incision Approach for Right Hemicolectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Objectives: There is general agreement on the benefits of laparoscopy for treatment of rectal and left colon cancers, whereas findings regarding the comparison of laparoscopic and open right colonic resections are discordant. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the outcomes and advantages of laparoscopic versus transverse-incision open surgery for management of right colon cancer. Materials and Methods: A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Comparative studies evaluating the results of laparoscopic and transverse-incision open right hemicolectomies were analyzed. The measured outcomes were mean operative time, time to feeding, duration of hospital stay, and number of lymph nodes harvested. Results: A total of 5 studies including 318 patients met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis revealed no differences in time to resume oral feeding, hospital stay, and number of lymph nodes harvested in between groups, but mean length of surgery was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group. Conclusion: These data confirm that the preferred approach to right hemicolectomy is yet unclear. Laparoscopy has a longer operative time than transverse-incision open surgery, and no significant short-term benefits were observed for the studied parameters. Well-designed randomized control trials (RCTs) might help to identify the differences between these two techniques for the surgical treatment of right colon cancer.

Procedural and post-operative complications associated with laparoscopic versus open abdominal surgery for right-sided colonic cancer resection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In this analysis, we aimed to systematically compare the procedural and post-operative complications (POC) associated with laparoscopic versus open abdominal surgery for right-sided colonic cancer resection.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, and Google scholar for English studies comparing the POC in patients who underwent laparoscopic versus open surgery (OS) for right colonic cancer. Data were assessed by the Cochrane-based RevMan 5.4 software (The Cochrane Community, London, UK). Mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to represent the results for continuous variables, whereas risk ratios (RR) with 95% CIs were used for dichotomous data.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies involving a total number of 3410 participants with right colonic carcinoma were included in this analysis. One thousand five hundred and fifteen participants were assigned to undergo invasive laparoscopic surgery whereas 1895 participants were assigned to the open abdominal surgery. Our results showed that the open resection was associated with a shorter length of surgery (MD: 48.63, 95% CI: 30.15-67.12; P = .00001) whereas laparoscopic intervention was associated with a shorter hospital stay [MD (-3.09), 95% CI [-5.82 to (-0.37)]; P = .03]. In addition, POC such as anastomotic leak (RR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.60-1.55; P = .88), abdominal abscess (RR: 1.13, 95% CI: 0.52-2.49; P = .75), pulmonary embolism (RR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.09-1.69; P = .21) and deep vein thrombosis (RR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.39-2.28; P = .89) were not significantly different. Paralytic ileus (RR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.67-1.11; P = .26), intra-abdominal infection (RR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.15-4.48; P = .82), pulmonary complications (RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.57-1.20; P = .32), cardiac complications (RR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.42-1.27; P = .27) and urological complications (RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.52-1.33; P = .44) were also similarly manifested. Our analysis also showed 30-day re-admission and re-operation, and mortality to be similar between laparoscopic versus OS for right colonic carcinoma resection. However, surgical wound infection (RR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.50-0.86; P = .002) was significantly higher with the OS.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, laparoscopic surgery was almost comparable to OS in terms of post-operative outcomes for right-sided colonic cancer resection and was not associated with higher unwanted outcomes. Therefore, laparoscopic intervention should be considered as safe as the open abdominal surgery for right-sided colonic cancer resection, with a decreased hospital stay.

Current status and trend of laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for colon cancer

Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRH) is utilized worldwide as one of the standard surgical treatments for right-sided colon cancer. However, there have been issues concerning its applicability, techniques, and trend. The present study aimed to elucidate the current status and trend of LRH by reviewing literature focusing on important issues associated with this surgery. Based on previous studies, LRH most likely provides better short-term outcomes and similar oncological outcomes compared to open surgery. Despite the increasing use of robotic approach in this surgery, it seems to have always been associated with longer operative times and greater hospital cost with limited advantage. Intracorporeal anastomosis seems to improve short-term outcomes, such as quicker recovery of bowel function, compared to extracorporeal anastomosis. However, it does not contribute to shorter hospital stay. With regard to dissection technique, various approaches, and landmarks have been advocated to overcome the technical difficulty in LRH. This difficulty is likely to be caused by anatomical variation, especially in venous structures. The superiority of one approach or landmark over another is still argued about due to the lack of large-scale prospective studies. However, deep understanding both of anatomical variation and characteristics of each approach would be of extreme importance to minimize adverse effects and maximize patient benefit after LRH.

Implementation of intracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right colectomy is safe and associated with a shorter hospital stay

Reconstruction after laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) can be achieved by performing an intracorporeal (IA) or an extracorporeal anastomosis (EA). This study aims to assess the safety of implementing IA in LRC, and to compare its perioperative outcomes with EA during an institution's learning curve. Patients undergoing elective LRC with IA or EA in a teaching university hospital between January 2015 and December 2018 were included. Demographic, clinical, perioperative and histopathological data were collated and outcomes investigated. One hundred and twenty-two patients were included; forty-three (35.2%) had an IA. The main indication for surgery was cancer in both groups (83.7% for IA and 79.8% for EA; p = 0.50). Operative time was longer for IA (180 [150-205] versus 150 [120-180] minutes; p < 0.001). A Pfannenstiel incision was used as extraction site in 97.7% of patients receiving an IA; while a midline incision was used in 97.5% of patients having an EA (p < 0.001). Hospital stay was significantly shorter for IA (3 [3, 4] versus 4 [3-6] days; p = 0.003). There were no differences in postoperative complications rates between groups. There was a 4.7% and 3.8% anastomotic leak rate in the IA and EA group, respectively (p = 1). Re-intervention and readmission rates were similar between groups, and there was no mortality during the study period. The implementation of IA in LRC is safe. Despite longer operative times, IA is associated with a shorter hospital stay when compared to EA in the setting of an institution's learning curve.

Robotic vs laparoscopic right colectomy – the burden of age and comorbidity in perioperative outcomes: An observational study

BACKGROUND

Several studies have shown the safety, feasibility and oncologic adequacy of robotic right hemicolectomy (RRH). Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRH) is considered technically challenging. Robotic surgery has been introduced to overcome this technical limitation, but it is related to high costs. To maximize the benefits of such surgery, only selected patients are candidates for this technique. In addition, due to progressive aging of the population, an increasing number of minimally invasive procedures are performed on elderly patients with severe comorbidities, who are usually more prone to post-operative complications.

AIM

To investigate the outcomes of RRH vs LRH with regard to age and comorbidities.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 123 minimally invasive procedures (68 LRHs vs 55 RRHs) for right colon cancer or endoscopically unresectable adenoma performed in our Center from January 2014 until September 2019. The surgical procedures were performed according to standardized techniques. The primary clinical outcome of the study was the length of hospital stay (LOS) measured in days. Secondary outcomes were time to first flatus (TFF) and time to first stool evacuation. The robotic technique was considered the exposure and the laparoscopic technique was considered the control. Routine demographic variables were obtained, including age at time of surgery and gender. Body mass index and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status were registered. The age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index (ACCI) was calculated; the tumor-node-metastasis system, intra-operative variables and post-operative complications were recorded. Post-operative follow-up was 180 d.

RESULTS

LOS, TFF, and time to first stool were significantly shorter in the robotic group: Median 6 [interquartile range (IQR) 5-8] vs 7 (IQR 6-10.5) d, P = 0.028; median 2 (IQR 1-3) vs 3 (IQR 2-4) d, P < 0.001; median 4 (IQR 3-5) vs 5 (IQR 4-6.5) d, P = 0.005, respectively. Following multivariable analysis, the robotic technique was confirmed to be predictive of significantly shorter hospitalization and faster restoration of bowel function; in addition the dichotomous variables of age over 75 years and ACCI more than 7 were significant predictors of hospital stay. No outcomes were significantly associated with Clavien-Dindo grading. Sub-group analysis demonstrated that patients aged over 75 years had a longer LOS (median 6 -IQR 5-8- vs 7 -IQR 6-12- d, P = 0.013) and later TFF (median 2 -IQR 1-3- vs 3 -IQR 2-4- d, P = 0.008), while patients with ACCI more than 7 were only associated with a prolonged hospital stay (median 7 -IQR 5-8- vs 7 -IQR 6-14.5- d, P = 0.036).

CONCLUSION

RRH is related to shorter LOS when compared with the laparoscopic approach, but older age and several comorbidities tend to reduce its benefits.

Indocyanine green fluorescence imaging to assess bowel perfusion during totally laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer

BACKGROUND

To retrospectively evaluate the feasibility and safety of intraoperative assessment of bowel perfusion in totally laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer using indocyanine green fluorescence imaging (IGFI).

METHODS

From October 2017 to June 2019, consecutive patients with colon cancer who underwent totally laparoscopic surgery were enrolled retrospectively and grouped into the IGFI group (n = 84) and control group (n = 105). In the IGFI group, indocyanine green (ICG) was injected intravenously, and the bowel perfusion was observed using a fluorescence camera system prior to and after completion of the anastomosis.

RESULTS

The two groups were demographically comparable. The IGFI group exhibited a significantly shorter operative time (p = 0.0374) while intraoperative blood loss did not significantly differ among the groups (p = 0.062). In the IGFI group, average time to perfusion fluorescence was 48.4 ± 14.0 s after ICG injection, and four patients (4.8%) were required to choose a more proximal point of resection due to the lack of adequate fluorescence at the point previously selected. There were no differences in terms of pathological outcomes, postoperative recovery and the postoperative complication rates between the groups (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

IGFI shows promise as a safe and feasible tool to assess bowel perfusion during a totally laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer and may reduce the operative time.

Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: the SICE (Società Italiana di Chirurgia Endoscopica e Nuove Tecnologie) network prospective trial on 1225 cases comparing intra corporeal versus extra corporeal ileo-colic side-to-side anastomosis

Background

While laparoscopic approach for right hemicolectomy (LRH) is considered appropriate for the surgical treatment of both malignant and benign diseases of right colon, there is still debate about how to perform the ileo-colic anastomosis. The ColonDxItalianGroup (CoDIG) was designed as a cohort, observational, prospective, multi-center national study with the aims of evaluating the surgeons’ attitude regarding the intracorporeal (ICA) or extra-corporeal (ECA) anastomotic technique and the related surgical outcomes.

Methods

One hundred and twenty-five Surgical Units experienced in colorectal and advanced laparoscopic surgery were invited and 85 of them joined the study. Each center was asked not to change its surgical habits. Data about demographic characteristics, surgical technique and postoperative outcomes were collected through the official SICE website database. One thousand two hundred and twenty-five patients were enrolled between March 2018 and September 2018.

Results

ICA was performed in 70.4% of cases, ECA in 29.6%. Isoperistaltic anastomosis was completed in 85.6%, stapled in 87.9%. Hand-sewn enterotomy closure was adopted in 86%. Postoperative complications were reported in 35.4% for ICA and 50.7% for ECA; no significant difference was found according to patients’ characteristics and technologies used. Median hospital stay was significantly shorter for ICA (7.3 vs. 9 POD). Postoperative pain in patients not prescribed opioids was significantly lower in ICA group.

Conclusions

In our survey, a side-to-side isoperistaltic stapled ICA with hand-sewn enterotomy closure is the most frequently adopted technique to perform ileo-colic anastomosis after any indications for elective LRH. According to literature, our study confirmed better short-term outcomes for ICA, with reduction of hospital stay and postoperative pain.

Trial registration

Clinical trial (Identifier: NCT03934151).

Fashioning enterotomy closure after totally laparoscopic ileocolic anastomosis for right colon cancer: a multicenter experience

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy is a commonly performed procedure. Little is known on how to perform the enterotomy closure after stapled side-to-side intracorporeal anastomosis.

METHOD

A multicentric case-controlled study has been designed to compare different ways to fashion enterotomy closure: double layer versus single layer, sewn versus stapled, and robotic versus laparoscopic approach. Furthermore, additional characteristics including sutures' materials, interrupted versus running suture and the presence of deep corner suture has been investigated.

RESULTS

We collected data for 1092 patients who underwent right hemicolectomy at ten centers. We analyzed 176 robotic against 916 laparoscopic anastomosis: no significant differences were found in terms of bleedings (p = 0.455) and anastomotic leak (p = 0.405). We collected data from 126 laparoscopic sewn single-layer versus 641 laparoscopic sewn double-layer anastomosis: a significant reduction was recorded in terms of leaks in double-layer group (p = 0.02). About double-layer characteristics, we found a significant reduction of bleedings (p = 0.008) and leaks (p = 0.017) with a running suture; similarly, a reduction of bleedings (p = 0.001) and leaks (p = 0.005) was observed with the usage of deep corner closure. The presence of a barbed suture thread seemed to significantly reduce both bleedings (p = 0.001) and leaks (p = 0.001). We found no significant differences in terms of bleedings (p = 0.245) and anastomotic leak (p = 0.660) comparing sewn versus stapled anastomosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Fashioning a stapled ileocolic intracorporeal anastomosis, we can recommend the adoption of a double-layer enterotomy closure using a running barbed suture in the first layer. Totally, stapled closure and robotic assistance have to be considered a non-inferior alternative.